Way2Old4Dis wrote:If it's true that Amal is in Egypt, then it obviously wasn't a last-minute thing, and the takeaway from the somehow-botched interview is that she was going, no matter what might happen.

As for the "We'll get them out" comment... Ever consider that he just meant 'we' as in 'the good guys?' Or that he's gotten used to speaking of his wife as a partner? Or any other explanation other than that George Clooney thinks he's an international lawyer?

Yes that could be. And maybe he even mentioned his dad as a newsman and meant with "we" all involved in media in general. And all that got cut out when the article was written....

Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird has turned down a request to meet face-to-face with high-profile human rights lawyer Amal Clooney.Clooney, along with Canadian lawyer Lorne Waldman, are representing Canadian-Egyptian Al-Jazeera journalist Mohamed Fahmy.

Fahmy and two other journalists have been in a Cairo prison for more than a year, accused of spreading false news and being sympathetic to Egypt's outlawed Muslim Brotherhood.

Last Friday, Clooney and Waldman requested a meeting with Baird before his visit to Cairo. The lawyers wanted to discuss the details of Fahmy's potential deportation back to Canada. Fahmy's family said Clooney was ready to fly to Ottawa as soon as a meeting could be arranged.

But that meeting won't happen.

In an email, a spokesman for Baird said the minister will raise the issue with the "highest levels of the Egyptian government."

"To date, Mr. Fahmy's legal team has had an open dialogue with our mission in Cairo, and we believe that this remains the best course of action," spokesman Adam Hodge told CBC News.

The family of Mohamed Fahmy says they have been told by a senior Egyptian government official that Fahmy's deportation back to Canada is in it "final phase."A new law passed in Egypt last November allows for foreign convicts or suspects to be transferred to their countries to serve their sentence or to be tried.

Waldman told CBC news that "conditions are ripe for [Fahmy's] return." But he added he had hoped the details could have been hammered out with the Baird before the minister's trip to Egypt.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]Al Jazeera journalists Peter Greste (L) Mohamed Fahmy (C) and Baher Mohamed (R) - AFP/Khaled Desouki

By Nourhan MagdiCAIRO: The family of jailed Al-Jazeera journalist Mohamed Fahmy is seeking different legal procedures to secure his release to receive better treatment for a broken arm and hepatitis C virus, his fiancé Marwa Omran told The Cairo Post Thursday.“We hope Fahmy will be released due to his health condition, as he needs to undergo an operation for his broken arm and receive specific hepatitis C treatment. We are seeking now to get him out through either the new deportation law or to put him on bail pending the case,” said Omran.She said that Fahmy had previously undergone an operation under the auspices of the prison authority, but added that Fahmy still needs medical care for his arm that is not available in prison.Egyptian-Canadian Fahmy and two of his colleagues, Australian Peter Greste and Egyptian Baher Mohamed, had their conviction on charges of broadcasting false news overturned Jan. 1 in response to an appeal filed. The case will be retried, the date of which has not yet been determined.She said the families of the three journalists were happy when the appeal was accepted, but they were hoping for at least a release on bail, to see their relatives.The families of both Greste and Fahmy, the two journalists with foreign nationalities, have announced that they are seeking extradition, in what appears to be taking advantage of Sisi’s recent deportation law, which allows him to send non-Egyptian defendants to their home countries to be tried or serve a sentence.With the nationality restrictions, the Egyptian journalist Baher Mohamed has been left with limited options.“This [deportation] law came in favor of the case. We have already applied for deporting Fahmy to Canada in a request submitted to the President and the public prosecution, and the request is being processed now before the Egyptian authorities,” said Fahmy’s fiancé Omran. Since the deportation decree is still new, with little understood about its regulation, Omran said, “we are moving step by step parallel to each development unravels in the case.”Omran said that Fahmy’s deportation is “one of the best options” in front of his family, as the retrial might take months to begin. Another route is a release on bail, which will require the family wait until the new court session is convened to submit a request.Some lawyers believe the case will not take long before being heard in court due to the international attention.Lawyer Shaaban Saeed told The Cairo Post that if the judiciary released the three journos “[the judiciary] is then satisfying justice as the three journalists have been wronged; the public opinion as the three are jailed over freedom of expression –related charges and the regime, which is also seeking a way to get them out.”The three journalists were sentenced in June 2014 to between seven to 10 years in prison over charges of spreading false news in favor of a terrorist group, in reference to the Muslim Brotherhood. They denied their charges and have denounced the trial as a “sham.”Datelined “Torah,” a prison where the three are kept in custody, Fahmy wrote an opinion article that appeared on Jan. 6 in The New York Times, titled “Al Jazeera Journalists Are Not Egypt’s Enemies,” where he said his case was manipulated amid a “geopolitical game.”“The government of President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi chose to view us as agents of a malicious political agenda. In reality, we are closer to being hostages,” wrote Fahmy.He also wrote, “Despite the banning of Al Jazeera Mubasher Misr, I accepted the challenge to run the Al Jazeera English bureau because I trusted the professionalism of its journalists and because I believed the Egyptian government would respect the difference between the two channels.”Knowing the distinction between both Arabic and English versions of Al-Jazeera broadcast, Fahmy said in his article that he “emphasized to the management in Qatar that none of our reports should be dubbed in Arabic.”It was not possible to reach Lawyer Amal Clooney, who represents Fahmy, as she refrains from giving press statements at the meantime, said Fahmy’s fiancé Omran.“[Clooney] is a kind friend of Fahmy and her recent [press statements] were only to deny wrong reports taken on her behalf as she cares for the interest of Fahmy’s case,” added Omran.Omran said that, in Fahmy’s case, “The lawyers believe in Fahmy’s acquittal and innocence that most of them have reduced their fees,” adding that Clooney has cut her fees by about 90 percent and that she is only getting “symbolic” payment

Egypt is blasting human rights lawyer Amal Clooney for alleging that an official threatened her with arrest if she published a scathing report on judicial corruption.

"We have nothing against her," Interior Ministry spokesman, Hani Abdel Latif, said Sunday. "She should say exactly who said that. Why not specify from the start who told her that?"

Clooney, the wife of actor George Clooney, spent a week in Egypt last year as part of an investigation into the country's policy of allowing government officials to handpick judges and influence prosecutions.

That system, Clooney said, led to the convictions of three Al Jazeera journalists.

Last week, Clooney sent shockwaves across Egypt with her claim that she was targeted after publishing the report in February.

"When I went to (release) the report, they stopped us from doing it in Cairo," Clooney told the Guardian.A MONDAY, MARCH 31, 2014 FILE PHOTO. EGYPT OUT Heba Elkholy/AP Al Jazeera journalists Baher Mohamed (left), Mohammed Fahmy (center), and Peter Greste appear in court during their trial on terror charges in March in Cairo.

No I don't think George was telling something untrue to this guy ( was a man Jon Hiscock ). Maybe the guy misinterpreted George. Maybe he was just saying something like

she is negotiating for the release of one of the three al-Jazeera journalists jailed after being found guilty of spreading false news and supporting the now-banned Muslim Brotherhood organisation in June.

And the guy just added "she is currently in Egypt" as she wasn't at the Event so he calculated 1+1 and the result was 3 that's why we got this article

Nicky, sorry. You're right. It was John Hiscock (he he) who explained that Amal was in Egypt and that was why Amal wasn't with him for the reception. I got him confused with the woman who George talked to about Amal not having a stylist.

Ok, so it was not a direct quote from George that Amal was in Egypt, HOWEVER, we KNOW that George has told a lie or 10 in the past, so don't think for a minute that he WOULDN'T tell a lie to suit his agenda.

Saying she's in Egypt if she isn't is a lie that could so easily be checked. Why risk being called a liar over something so unimportant? There are a million reasons he could have given for her not being with him that night.

Well, I think quite a lot was lost in translation at the event. And it wouldn't surprise me to hear that she 'was working in the Egypt' thing or 'she's dealing with Egypt' being misinterpreted as 'in Egypt' at all..........

She does a ton of stuff we know nothing about......and her clients probably like it that way

Mmmm confused, this reporter got it wrong or George got it wrong, or AA left to home saying I'm going Egypt and George think she on way to Egypt. But she decide no go or miss flight and party. Then she decide go to Canada, but no go there. All week Amal look to go somewhere MORE important than GG, and end up with just ppl talking about where she to go BUT all she do stay home and choose dress, because she use no stylist but George maybe got that wrong maybe too. George not good communication, and now things written from that night we NO believe any persons version of what he say???How. Do you decide?

party animal - not! wrote:Well, I think quite a lot was lost in translation at the event. And it wouldn't surprise me to hear that she 'was working in the Egypt' thing or 'she's dealing with Egypt' being misinterpreted as 'in Egypt' at all..........

She does a ton of stuff we know nothing about......and her clients probably like it that way

or " She's working on getting a journalist freed from an Egyptian prison." Some folks might assume she is in Egypt, but not necessarily the case.

If George said she was in Egypt last week then unless the reporter didn't speak or understand English very well I will sssume Amal was in Egypt. She obviously travels frequently without us knowing of her whereabouts and she would probably prefer it this way after all the publicity she's received.

Amal Clooney to take on next high profile case after Elgin Marbles – the denial of the Armenian genocide by Turks in 1915

After weighing into the Elgin Marbles controversyand the imprisonment of journalists in Egypt, Amal Clooney is to step into another high-profile case – the Armenian genocide.A century on from the 1915 genocide, in which up to 1.5 million Armenians were slaughtered by the Ottoman Turks, the newly wed wife of George Clooney will be part of a legal team representing Armenia in a case involving denial of the genocide by a Turkish politician.Dogu Perincek was found guilty by a Swiss court in 2008 of denying, during a visit to Switzerland, that the genocide ever took place.Mr Perincek, from the Left-wing Turkish Workers’ Party, called the genocide "an international lie" and was fined by the court in Switzerland.He appealed to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, which ruled in Dec 2013 that Switzerland had violated his right to free expression.

That appeal is now being challenged by Armenia, with the case to be heard by the Strasbourg court’s 17-member Grand Chamber. The first hearing has been scheduled for Jan 28.The Armenians argue that denying the genocide should be a crime, just as negating the Holocaust of six million Jews is a punishable offence in many countries.They say judges from the court in Strasbourg made a series of legal and factual errors when they overturned Mr Perincek’s original conviction.During the case, Turkey submitted historical documents questioning the veracity of the genocide.As with the Elgin Marbles case, Mrs Clooney will work alongside her head of chambers, Geoffrey Robertson, QC.Their involvement in the case was confirmed to The Telegraph by their chambers in London.Mr Robertson recently published a book on the historical controversy, “An Inconvenient Genocide: Who Now Remembers the Armenians?”.The book, released in October, “proves beyond reasonable doubt that the horrific events of 1915 constituted the crime against humanity that is known today as genocide”, according to the publishers, Random House.Armenians around the world will commemorate the centenary of the genocide on April 24, when Armenians began to be rounded up and killed by the Turks.Tens of thousands of able-bodied men were killed while women, children and the elderly were forced out of Turkey on death marches into the Syrian desert.In a contemporary report, the New York Times described the massacres as “a plan to exterminate the whole Armenian people".Turkey continues to deny that the genocide took place, but it is recognised as such by more than 20 countries around the world.Two weeks after marrying the Hollywood actor and director in Venice, Oxford-educated Mrs Clooney was in Athens to advise the Greek government on how best to proceed with their claim over the Elgin Marbles, which are on display at the British Museum in London.A barrister with Doughty Street Chambers in London, she was called to the bar in 2010 and specialises in international law, human rights and extradition. Fluent in French and Arabic, she has represented Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, and Yulia Tymoshenko, the former prime minister of Ukraine.

Last edited by Nicky80 on Tue Jan 13 2015, 20:10; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : added text)

15.01.15 |Amal Clooney| On 15 January 2015 the Foreign Minister of Canada John Baird met with his Egyptian counterpart Sameh Shoukry. During a press conference after the meeting, Mr Baird reportedly stated that the discussion was constructive and that a resolution to the case of falsely imprisoned Egyptian-Canadian journalist Mohamed Fahmy was expected “in short order”.

We thank the Government of Canada for its efforts in seeking Mr Fahmy’s return. We are however disappointed that nothing more concrete was announced after the meeting and we hope that the Canadian government is resolved to continue the diplomatic process until Fahmy is released and can return home.

Mohamed Fahmy has provided the following statement to us which he would like to address to the Canadian government:

"I understand that the ability of the Canadian government to help me is limited by the rules of diplomacy. But I do believe that Prime Minister Harper could do more to obtain my release if he were to directly intervene in our case. My situation and the ongoing legal limbo that I am enduring affects all Canadians who are in the Middle East because it shows that anyone, regardless of how innocent, can become a victim of the political turbulence here. And rest assured there will be other Canadians who will suffer like me as long as there is such injustice in this region. Canada and Egypt have friendly relations and so I hope you will continue to advocate until the diplomatic process results in my release. It is vital that Ottawa continues to engage with my lawyers Amal Clooney and Lorne Waldman at this critical stage of the negotiations so that my colleagues and I can achieve a smooth transition to freedom".

The Egyptian President has the power to pardon Mr Fahmy – who was convicted and sentenced to 7 years in prison on bogus charges of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and fabricating false news following an unfair trial. Under Egypt’s constitution this pardon can be issued any time. Even if he is not pardoned, Mr Fahmy can immediately be deported or released on health grounds. Although Egypt’s highest court has now ordered a retrial, this will be a lengthy process, with no guarantee of a fair outcome the second time around. It is therefore essential that Fahmy be transferred to Canada as soon as possible, in compliance with Egyptian and Canadian laws and applicable international instruments.

Amal Clooney

Lorne Waldman

Counsel for Mohamed Fahmy

Last edited by Nicky80 on Fri Jan 16 2015, 06:34; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : added text)

Amal Clooney's appearance at the Golden Globes on Sunday alongside "trophy husband" George unsurprisingly caused a buzz, and not just Giuliana Rancic's buzz fromawkwardly doing a shot while the couple looked on. While Mr. Clooney was there to accept a lifetime achievement award for his work in film, host Tina Fey pointed out that Mrs. Clooney's achievements have somewhat dwarfed those of her husband. As Fey pointed out, "Amal is a human rights lawyer who worked on the Enron case, was an adviser to Kofi Annan regarding Syria, and was selected for a three-person U.N. commission investigating rules of war violations in the Gaza Strip. So tonight, her husband is getting a lifetime achievement award." Yet although Fey makes Clooney sounds like a one-woman global savior, her actual professional history is a bit more complicated than that.

While Amal Clooney's resume reads like most human rights activists' wildest dreams (stints working for the UN, heads of states, and ambassadors are not easy to come by) the term "human rights lawyer" is somewhat misunderstood by the public to mean "saint." Although Clooney's work for organizations such as theInternational Court of Justice, where she clerked during law school, and the United Nations is laudable both professionally and morally, there are also some not-so-savory clients whose human rights violations make it clear that she is their defense lawyer, not prosecutor.

Clooney's client list includes not only the ostensible "good guys" like former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, but also very questionable characters like the King of Bahrain and Abdullah al Senussi. She served as Bahraini King Hasan bin Isa al Khalifa's legal advisor on the Bassiouni Commission, a royally established group charged with investigating claims of human rights violations during the Arab Spring uprisings in Bahrain in 2011. Briefly, troops sent by the Gulf Cooperation Council as well as the Bahraini security services crushed the uprising using excessive force, killing many civilians, and wounding and jailing thousands. The Bassiouni Commission itself found that peoplehad been tortured to death in police custody - yes, tortured to death - and that hundr eds more had been injured or killed, confirming what rights groups had already reported although on a smaller scale. Yet in this context, Clooney worked not on behalf of the violated but the violator, advising the King on human rights, presumably in order to absolve him of as much responsibility as possible, as any good defense lawyer does.

Abdullah al Senussi, another one of Clooney's clients, served as Muammar Gaddafi's intelligence chief and wascaptured in Libya in 2011. The International Criminal Court chargedhim with crimes against humanity in 2011 for his role in Gaddafi's brutal government as well as the Lockerbie bombing. Clooney's decision to continue to work on his defense drew some fire after she became engaged to her current spouse, as if her professional life might take a backseat to her then-fiancé's humanitarian image. Clooney's primary role in the case appears to be appealing the decision to hold the trial in Libya's domestic courts, however, claiming her client's right to meet with his lawyers was denied by the ICC.

Clooney herself justified her choice to work on behalf of al Senussi, saying that everyone has a right to a defense lawyer (extremely true) and criticizing the International Criminal Court for violating the rights of her client. Even though this may seem ironic, given the charges of human rights violations against al Senussi, due process is an integral, essential part of the international legal structure, and failures to uphold due process undermine the entire system. When it comes to those accused of war crimes or human rights violations, this includes the right to a defense, which Clooney provided professionally and convincingly in al Senussi's case. What's more, Clooney, while being many other laudable things, is also a lawyer, and lawyers make their living and reputation from acting as both prosecution and defense.

Clooney's defense of al Senussi and legal advising to al Khalifa is part of her success as a lawyer, and defense as well as prosecution is essential to ensure the functioning of international human rights law. It is a reminder that human rights lawyers are still lawyers, professionals who need to make a career by playing both sides of the courtroom. She is certainly not a saint, but a shrewd and passionate professional (some would dare to say "ambitious") who has advanced her career by taking the unsavory clients along with defending those whose rights have been violated. In doing so, Amal Clooney has proved that she is no angelic philanthropist whose job is but a hobby after being a wife, but a determined professional whose interest in her own career has been just as paramount as her idealism. To reduce her to a savior figure not only infantilizes her work and the work of all human rights lawyers, but also boils her multifaceted and controversial career choices down to simplistic idealism, which is hardly a way to make a living, and certainly not to make a successful legal career.

I haven't been following the case in detail but this man presumably appealed to the decision of the Swiss high court before the European Court of Human rights. I saw the name of the case and it's Perenik (or something like that) versus Switzerland so presumably Turkey and Armenia have come in as third parties before the ECHR. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) All three countries have ratified the European Treaty on Human Rights so they accept the jurisdiction of the court.So the party that goes to the Court wants to argue that there has been a violation of one of the human rights that are written down in the Treaty. The court then has to examen whether there has been a violation or not. Is this an answer to your question?

Only two lawyers in law firms get a mention in the Debrett's listing of the 500 most influential people in Great Britain - as the 250-year old guide appears to view barristers, including the new Amal Clooney, as the greater wielders of power.

Penelope Warne, senior partner of CMS Cameron McKenna, and Charlie Jacobs, co-head of the Linklaters mining group, are the only two people working in law firms to be mentioned in the 2015 listing of influential lawyers. The listing runs to 20 people and forms part of the full listing of 500 people across a broad range of sectors from art to business. InspirationMr Jacobs is described as a 'prominent transaction lawyer'. Ms Warne is described as possessing 'the influence and inspiration to improve female representation in the industry'. The other lawyers are barristers, judges and campaigners. Amal Clooney, newly-married to actor George Clooney, is described as 'one of the most influential human rights lawyers of her generation'. Source: Debretts

Last edited by Nicky80 on Wed Jan 28 2015, 19:54; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : added text)

Amal Clooney, the human rights barrister, has accused Turkey of double standards on freedom of expression for defending a Turkish Leftist who described the Armenian genocide an "international lie".Mrs Clooney, who is representing Armenia on behalf of Doughty Street Chambers along with Geoffrey Robertson QC, said Turkey's stance was hypocritical "because of its disgraceful record on freedom of expression”, including prosecutions of Turkish-Armenians who campaign for the1915 massacres to be called a genocide.She took on the case against Doğu Perinçek, chairman of the Turkish Workers' Party and an MP, who was found guilty of genocide denial and racial discrimination in Switzerland in 2007, but had his conviction overturned by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) after being defended by Turkey's government.The ECHR upheld his right to question in a “debate of clear public interest” and questioned if it was possible to define as a genocide, a policy of deliberate extermination, the massacres and deportations of Armenians by the Turks a century ago.The human rights lawyer, who married George Clooney her Hollywood film star husband last September, accused the Strasbourg’s court’s human rights judges of being “simply wrong”.

“It cast doubt doubt of the reality of genocide that Armenian people suffered a century ago,” she said“Armenia must have its day in court. The stakes could not be higher for the Armenian people.”Switzerland has laws against the denial of all genocide as part of its anti-racism laws but the ECHR ruled that Mr Perinçek's right to freedom of speech was violated when he was convicted as a criminal by a Swiss court for his claims.In a December 2013 judgement, the European court concluded that there was not a “general consensus" that the massacres of Armenians had constituted genocide and that only 20 countries out of 190 worldwide classed it as such.[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Amal Clooney and Geoffrey Robertson QC in courtOnly three European countries, Greece, Slovakia and Switzerland, ban the Armenian genocide denial. A French law was overturned on free speech grounds in the country’s constitutional court three years ago.Speaking in Lausanne in 2005, Mr Perinçek had said that the legal definition of Armenian genocide was an “international lie”, but did not dispute that the killings and deportations had taken place.Four and half minutes into her evidence of the historical record concerning events in 1915, including Ottoman Empire admissions of war crimes, the barrister was asked to conclude by the judges.“Mrs Clooney may I draw your attention to the fact that the Armenian government has gone over the time allocated, so I ask you to conclude,” said Dean Spielmann, the president of the court.She went on to insist that Armenia did not want to limit free speech or historical debate and accused Turkey of having double standards because of it’s own poor record on freedom of expression.“Armenia is not here to argue against freedom of expression anymore than Turkey is here to defend it. This court knows very well how disgraceful Turkey’s record on freedom of expression is,” she said."You have found against the Turkish government in 224 separate cases on freedom of expression grounds.”The Lebanese lawyer made a reference to Hrant Dink, the Turkish-Armenian newspaper editor, who was prosecuted by Turkey for arguing that the 1915 massacres were genocide.Mr Dink was then assassinated by a Turkish nationalist in 2007 for his views and ethnicity as an Armenian. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] People take part in a demonstration calling for justice over the murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink “Armenia has every interest in ensuring that its own citizens do not get caught in a net that criminalises speech too broadly. As the family of Hrant Dink know about all too well,” she said.In his evidence to the court, Mr Perinçek denied any motivation to incite hatred against Armenians, telling judges that he had been imprisoned for speaking up for one of Turkey’s other ethnic minorities, the Kurds.“We are here for the liberty of Europeans,” he said. "Liberty for those who criticise the established status quo.“I share the pain of Armenian citizens, you can not find a word of mine that expresses antagonism against them. I hold the great powers responsible for what happened in 1915. There should be no taboos for the right to speak.”His arguments were dismissed by Armenia’s legal team which was supporting Switzerland in defending the “unshakable” conviction.Geoffrey Robertson QC accused Mr Perincek of being an admirer of Talaat Pasha, one of the organisers of the Armenian genocide, a man he said was the “Ottoman’s Empire’s Hitler”.Mr Robertson argued that the Turkish Left-wing nationalist had travelled Europe deliberately trying to provoke a conviction for genocide denial in order to “arouse his supporters in Turkey”.“It was made by a man who only came to Switzerland in order to be convicted. That was his purpose. He went to Germany, France, at the end of the day he tried to go Greece to expostulate but was turned away. He is genocide denier forum shopper,” he said.“He is an incurable genocide denier, a criminal and a vexatious litigant.”

Asked by the Telegraph about fevered speculation about what she would be wearing for the court appearance, Mrs Clooney laughed and pointed to her black barrister’s robes.“I’m wearing Ede and Ravenscroft,” she joked, in a reference to the famous English company of legal robe makers and tailors since 1689.Mr Robertson said he was was surprised at the rows of photographers when legal teams entered the court, which does not generally excite press attention or attract packs of photographers.He said he was pleased that coverage of the case would focus attention on Mrs Clooney's career as a lawyer rather than her private life as the wife of a film celebrity, Hollywood actor and director.“It is not about white gloves or yachts. It puts the record straight, she is a human rights lawyer,” he said.

Last edited by Nicky80 on Wed Jan 28 2015, 20:02; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : added text and pics)

Amal Clooney, the human rights lawyer, has accused Turkey of double standards on freedom of expression for defending a Turkish Leftist who called the Armenian genocide an "international lie".The barrister, who is representing Armenia on behalf of Doughty Street Chambers along with Geoffrey Robertson QC, said Turkey's stance was hypocritical "because of [its] record on freedom of expression".Mrs Clooney took on the case against Doğu Perinçek, chairman of the Turkish Workers' Party, who was found guilty of racial discrimination in Switzerland in 2007, but had his conviction overturned by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).Switzerland has laws against the denial of the genocide as part of its anti-racism laws but the ECHR ruled that Mr Perinçek's Article 10 right to freedom of speech was violated when Mr Perinçek made his claims.Three countries ban the denial of freedom of speech including Greece, Slovakia and Switzerland. A French law was overturned on free speech grounds in the country’s constitutional court.

Related Articles

During the ECHR case, the Turkish government also submitted written comments as a third party questioning the veracity of the genocide. Now Armenia is a third-party in the case and is appealing the ECHR decision.Mrs Clooney told the Strasbourg court’s 17-member Grand Chamber on Wednesday she wanted to correct the record on the Armenian genocide because the previous ruling "cast doubt on the reality of genocide that the Armenian people suffered a century ago".“Armenia must have its day in court. The stakes could not be higher for the Armenian people," she added.Mr Perinçek had said in 2005 that calling the 1915 massacres and deportations of Armenian a genocide was an “international lie”, but did not dispute that the killings had taken place on a smaller scale.The ECHR upheld his right to question in a “debate of clear public interest” without ruling on whether massacres were a genocide, a policy of deliberate extermination by Turks, or not in December 2013.The European judges concluded that there was not a “general consensus" on whether what happened was a genocide.Four and half minutes into her evidence of the historical record concerning events in 1915, including Ottoman Empire admissions of war crimes, the barrister was asked to conclude by the judges.“Mrs Clooney may I draw your attention to the fact that the Armenian government has gone over the time allocated, so I ask you to conclude,” said Dean Spielmann, the president of the court.She insisted that Armenia did not want to limit free speech or historical debate and accused Turkey of having double standards because it’s own poor record on freedom of expression.“Armenia is not here to argue against freedom of expression anymore than Turkey is here to defend it. This court knows very well how disgraceful Turkey’s record on freedom of expression is. You have found against the Turkish government in 224 separate cases on freedom of expression grounds,”The Lebanese lawyer made a reference to Hrant Dink, the Turkish-Armenian newspaper editor, who was prosecuted by Turkey for inviting that the 1915 massacres were genocide.Mr Dink was then assassinated by a Turkish nationalist in 2007 for his views and ethnicity as an Armenian.“Armenia has every interest in ensuring that its win citizens do not get caught in a net that criminalises speech too broadly. As the family of Hrant Dink know about all too well,” she said.

Asked about the feverish speculation about what she would be wearing, Mrs Clooney laughed and pointed to her barrister’s robes.“I’m wearing Ede and Ravenscroft,” she told the Telegraph, in a reference to famous English company of legal robe makers and tailors since 1689.

Mr Robertson QC, was surprised at the rows of paparazzi when they arrived in court after she was mobbed in Greece after being involved in the Elgin marbles case.

“It is not about white gloves or yachts. It puts the record straight, she is a human rights lawyer," he said.